During the 2024-25 academic year, the Northeastern University Archives and Special Collections (NUASC) scanned 24,608 pages of archival materials for both in-person and remote researchers. This output has allowed NUASC to serve more researchers and broaden access to these primary sources by uploading them into the Digital Repository Service (DRS).
A photo from the National Center of Afro-American Artists records
Work to put these reference scans into the DRS began in 2023 with a backlog of scans from NUASC’s remote reference program. Archives staff understood the research value of readily available scans and wanted to make them more accessible to anyone, regardless of institutional affiliation or research goals. Uploading these files into the DRS was a collaborative effort between Metadata and Digital Projects Supervisor Drew Facklam, Reference and Outreach Archivist Molly Brown, and Reference and Reproductions Archivist Grace Millet.
Once a workflow was developed to clean up and provide information about the files, collections were identified based on community and researcher needs, as well as the quantity of scans. As of June 2025, 14,226 pages of digitized materials have been ingested into the DRS. Reference scans have come from the:
Reference scans are completed at a lower resolution than scans used for publication, though they are still entirely legible and usable for research purposes. Another important difference between reference scans and other digitized materials in the DRS is the format of reference scans’ titles, which allow users a glimpse into the inner workings of archival organization.
The titles of these files contain the collection number, box number, folder number, and folder title.
With this knowledge, anyone viewing these files can discern where they are located within NUASC’s collections. This allows for easy reference if a researcher might need to request a higher-quality scan of a specific item.
To learn more about what is available in the Digital Repository Service from NUASC, you can search our digitized collections or reach out to us at archives@northeastern.edu. The public services team is looking forward to continuing this expansion of access to collections stewarded by NUASC!
One of my recent projects was to digitize the very first issues of Tastemakers, Northeastern’s student-run music magazine, which began in 2007 and is still running today. Since the 2010-11 academic year, all issues were created in a born-digital format, so they were easy to add to the Digital Repository Service earlier this year. However, the first 19 issues were not, so it was my job to scan them on our Bookeye scanner and turn them into PDFs ready to be made accessible.
Since the issues in question date from 2007 to mid-2010, they fall exactly in the transitional moment of the music industry when legal streaming was still a novel concept, but CDs had fallen largely out of fashion in favor of iPods and other portable mp3 players. Consequently, as I was going through the magazines, I found an assortment of pieces that are retrospectively funny because we, in 2024, know the outcomes of all their speculations (most of which didn’t happen).
The articles I found fell into two broad categories: devices and streaming, both of which provide an interesting (as well as amusing) look at the future we imagined music would have at that time.
Let’s start with devices. The two pieces I found are on the potentiality of USB sticks and microSD cards as the dominant form of physical media to replace CDs. The USB article discusses a few bands and artists circa 2008, including Matchbox Twenty and Jennifer Lopez, who released albums on USB sticks embedded in rubber bracelets, primarily as a marketing gimmick. The author wonders whether if the technology will catch on in earnest or remain a ploy. At the time, vinyl was already starting to make a resurgence as the go-to medium for people who want their music on a physical object, and that group is comprised primarily of people who care deeply about the auditory and visual technical details of their music. So, I think the bracelets were never really going to work, since a group of mp3 files on a rubber bracelet couldn’t match up to either the quality or experience of vinyl on a record player, and thus eliminated their theoretical primary market. (It’s also funny to imagine collectors’ storage for a bunch of rubber bracelets. Would you keep them in a basket? Individual cases? One of those divider boxes for sorting hardware? On a pegboard on your wall?)
Meanwhile, the microSD card piece talks about an attempt in late 2008 by major record labels to supplant (or at least supplement) CDs with pre-loaded microSD cards, branding as slotMusic, that can go into any phone or mp3 player with a corresponding card slot. This one is interesting because it could have possibly been successful, but only in a universe where Apple wasn’t already the dominant force in the portable music player market. iPods were well established as everyone’s favorite internet-based mp3 player, and the iPhone was already becoming the most popular phone, which combined the two via a built-in iTunes app and completely removed the need to even have a separate device for music. Even if they had managed to carve out a market around Apple, rapid increases in storage capacity would have also rendered them useless within a handful of years. While 1GB was a significant amount of storage for the size of a microSD in 2008, 128GB microSDs were introduced in 2014, which is a 127,000% increase in about five years. They didn’t stop there. Today, microSD cards are available in sizes up to 1TB, which is big enough to fit 1,000 slotMusic cards on a single item. So, slotMusic never really stood a chance.
Now, on to streaming. Over the course of three years, Tastemakers published five different pieces about then-current and upcoming streaming services, effectively culminating (though not knowingly at the time) in a piece about the European launch of Spotify. Nearly all of the platforms mentioned are now entirely defunct, with some exceptions including Spotify and Amazon mp3 (now Amazon Music). The other remaining platforms now provide internet radio and recommendation sites, rather than streaming music, a fact that does not seem coincidental. Here’s a breakdown:
It’s also amusing now to think of Spotify as the hip new platform from Europe. Their article quotes other American journalists who had received early-access press accounts describing Spotify as “the world’s biggest iTunes collection” and “an almost infinite jukebox.” It sounds quaint in today’s world, but then you can’t describe something with words that don’t yet exist. Reading their predictions from 2009 about whether Spotify will be successful while others failed is like listening to someone try to predict the ending of a TV show that you’ve already finished.
I sat for about 30 minutes trying to think of something to speculate for the future the way that these articles speculated about streaming. The conclusion I came to is that I don’t think there are any more technological advancements that music needs to make; you can get a device that fits in your pocket with up to 1TB of space and provides access to anything on Spotify, iTunes, and YouTube. Either that, or, like the writes of Tastemakers in 2007-2010, I cannot even conceive of what is yet to come, exactly because it has not come yet.
Introducing the Boston Gay Men’s Chorus records finding aid By Dominique Medal
Boston Gay Men’s Chorus members talking pre-performance, 1990.
Records of the Boston Gay Men’s Chorus, who have been singing in Boston and beyond for more than 40 years, have been processed and are open for research in the Northeastern University Archives and Special Collections. A guide to the collection is available and Series 2 doubles as a chronology of the Chorus’ performances, special appearances, and international tours since its founding in 1982.
The Boston Gay Men’s Chorus was part of a wave of gay choruses established in the wake of the San Francisco Gay Men’s Chorus national tour in 1981. Since then, the Boston Chorus has grown to more than 200 singing members and has toured Europe, the Middle East, and South Africa. It is one of the largest community-based choral groups in New England.
The collection documents the Chorus’ live performances through audio and video recordings, photographs, concert programs, posters and marketing materials, and planning and logistics files. Also included are studio recordings and materials pertaining to the Chorus’ membership in the Gay and Lesbian Association of Choruses, which hosts the triennial GALA Festival for LGBTQ choruses. The collection also documents the Chorus’ advocacy work, internal administration, and fundraising efforts.
Introducing the Frieda Garcia papers finding aid By Irene Gates
Frieda Garcia, undated
Since starting as Processing Archivist at Northeastern University earlier this year, I’ve been lucky enough to work on the papers of Frieda Garcia, a beloved Boston-based community leader and activist. Garcia received her B.A. from The New School, where I previously worked, a coincidence that made processing her collection a welcome bridge between my past and present positions.
Throughout her career, Garcia advocated for Hispanic and Black communities in Boston, bilingual education, women’s rights, and multicultural media. Her papers, which she donated in 2015, document her work on these themes with community organizations La Alianza Hispana, United South End Settlements (USES), and the Roxbury Multi-Service Center. It also covers her service on several mayoral commissions and boards of organizations such as The Boston Foundation and the Isabella Stewart Gardner Museum, and other initiatives and conferences in which she participated. Annual reports to the USES Board of Directors, reports documenting Boston’s South End and Roxbury neighborhoods, and correspondence with individuals across the city are examples of materials in the collection.
This blog post is the first in a series by members of the Northeastern University Library’s Digital Production Services and Archives and Special Collections teams sharing their favorite images and their role in the Boston Globe Library Collection digitization project.
My name is Kim Kennedy and I’m the Digital Production Librarian in the Northeastern University Library. In our recent push to digitize Boston photographs from the Boston Globe Library photo morgue, I coordinated the work with our vendor Picturae. In four months, they digitized 59 boxes of material. I developed a workflow to perform quality control checks on the digitized items and helped prepare them for upload to our Digital Repository. Most of these images are limited to the Northeastern community while we determine the rights status of the photographs, but a subset has been reviewed and is available to the public.
Some of my favorite images are of the Boston Common Dairy Festival, an annual event in which cows returned to the Boston Common (in the 17th and 18th centuries, the Common was used as a cow pasture by colonists).
In an effort to engage in reparative description and a desire to improve the Library’s approach to processing and publishing digital collections by incorporating inclusive, non-discriminatory principles into our workflows, the Digital Production Services Department has been seeking new methods of description for digital collections that do not perpetuate harm to our patrons or to the communities described in the collections.
Admittedly, these are not new concepts. Building on the work of institutions and organizations such as the Digital Transgender Archive, Digital Public Library of America, and Digital Commonwealth (along with a host of other colleges and universities), our department has chosen to move forward with a three-pronged approach:
Creating an actionable list of reparative metadata practices we can engage in on the item and collection level with the Library and Archives’ collections in the Digital Repository Service (DRS).
Implementing updates for the upcoming version of the DRS, including new and expanded features which support inclusive description and mitigate harm.
Writing and generating institutional buy-in for a library-wide statement on conscious and inclusive description of our resources.
Much of this work is still underway, but we have made a lot of progress generating item-level statements to provide context to sensitive and questionable materials. We documented criteria for selecting items that need statements, instigated a regular group review with members of Archives for content that rises to the need of consideration, created thematic categories of content that merits item-level statements, and generated documentation to track and manage the addition of these statements to DRS resources. We have currently added contextual statements to over 120 individual items with our institutional repository. If you would like to review these materials in greater detail, here is a link to a set of materials we’ve added statements to (some materials may require you to sign into the DRS).
Here are some statistics from the initial implementation of this work:
More than 90% of the currently identified resources come from the Northeastern University Archives and Special Collections (NUASC), while the remainder of the Library’s collections that contain sensitive content come from community-built archives such as the Our Marathon collection (public collection). NUASC collections that content sensitive material include (but are not limited to):
Over 50% of the sensitive content contains overt racism or other forms of discrimination. The next most common category is graphic description of bodily harm, which almost exclusively comes from the Boston Globe Library Collection.
The content types vary, but almost 80% of identified digital objects are photographic in nature, with a much smaller portion of textual or audiovisual materials.
Two most commonly used statements are as follows:
This item has been flagged for racist or harmful content. We are preserving and making this item available as part of the historical record, but it does not reflect the values of Northeastern University Library. If you have any questions or concerns, please contact the Northeastern University Library Archives and Special Collections at archives@northeastern.edu.
This item has been flagged for a graphic depiction of bodily harm that may not be appropriate for all audiences. If you have any questions or concerns, please contact the Northeastern University Library Archives and Special Collections at archives@northeastern.edu.
Takeaways from patterns we have noticed in the process of identifying materials for statements:
As an institution that collects a wide variety of community-focused Civil Rights Era materials, there are a lot of items within the DRS that benefit from additional context and/or acknowledgement. For example, the Freedom House, Inc., records (M16, public collection) follows the institutional history of a community organizing group built to centralize activism for neighborhood improvement, quality education, and social, racial, and religious harmony in Roxbury, Mass. They collected a number of materials from an anti-busing racial hate group called ROAR, whose pamphlets and press releases we have digitized and added content statements to.
Photographs often lack context on the item level and therefore can be more jarring in their sensitivity. This is especially evident in the Boston Globe Library Collection, which contains thousands of print photographs taken by newspaper staff or contract photographers. Organized by topical subjects, the photo archive contains imagery related to difficult themes such as anti-busing demonstrations, fires, crime, and bombings.
There are items in the DRS which may be upsetting to some viewers, but after reaching consensus with the Archives staff, we do not feel that they rise to the level of needing contextual statements, given that their visual meaning is derived from their academic and research merit, such as marine animal necropsy photos in the Ocean Genome Legacy Project (public collection).
Ultimately, this is an ongoing process—one that will continue to need reflection and consideration from Library and Archives staff, as well as additional research on what other respected institutions are doing to provide context and mitigate harm. Inclusive descriptive practice is iterative, and as we continue this work, we will continue to reflect on the most effective ways to serve our users.
